In the alternatic chamber and duly noticed in two places, including the city's website in accordance with the requirements of RSA 91-A.

Alderman Dowd presiding.

Would the clerk please call the roll?

Alderman Johnson.

Alderman Derek Tebow here.

Alderman at large, Greg.

Here.

All the women at large, Soshauna Kelly.

Alderman Lodge, Michael O'Brien is in the flesh.

Alderman Tim Senate here.

And our Chairman Alderman Dowd.

Present.

You have one, two, three, four.

Five in attendance.

Any good.

And we're also joined by Assistant Police Chief Kenny.

And we have on Zoom.

Yeah, Zoom.

We have Christoph.

NSD Chief of Operating Officer.

And also we have Ms.

Don Enright, CFO for the City of Nashua.

And Alderman Ravan here.

So did I get it right?

Alderman Raven.

Raven.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yes.

And Alderman Ravan.

Okay.

Okay.

So the first item on the agenda is public comment.

Is there anyone that wishes to speak in public comment?

Name and city.

Gary Hoffman, uh 38 Perham Street, Nashua, New Hampshire.

I just want to speak in favor of the Secretary contract.

You know, we had a very productive negotiation session.

You know, your primary concern, of course, is the budgetary aspect of this agreement.

The the wage increases are fair.

Um on my end, there are they're a little there, they're a little on the low side, but um we understand the city's uh predicament.

Um but uh you know we urge you that this uh this agreement be passed uh at the budget committee tonight unanimously uh if we're able to get this done tonight and bring it to the full board of Alderman at the next meeting.

Um we can actually get this agreement signed, sealed, and delivered before the current agreement expires, which is uh be a great thing.

So just urge you to support it.

Thank you.

Any other public comment?

Okay communications there are none.

Unfinished business?

There is none.

New business resolutions before us this evening is our dash 26-040 approving the cost items of three sidebar agreements between the board of police commissioners and the police supervisors association and EPBA local 25 regarding vacation, sick leave, and personal days.

Mr.

Chairman, I'd like to make the motion to recommend final passage.

Okay, um Chief Kenny, did you want to come up in case there are questions?

You can sit.

You don't have to stand any questions relative to this contract.

Guess not all right.

So if there are no questions, uh then all those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries.

Thank you very much.

That's probably one of your easiest jobs all day, right?

Exactly.

Okay.

Also before us this evening is odd-26-041.

Approving the cost items of a collective bargaining agreement between the National Board of Education and the Nashua Teachers Union.

Local 10 Fighting Four AFT, AFL, CIO, UNITC, Secretaries from July 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2029.

Mr.

Chairman, I would like to make a recommendation.

Okay.

Motion is to recommend final passage of our 26041.

Mr.

Gray, did you want to give any oversight or overview of this before we get started and see if there are any questions?

You're on mute.

Let's try that again.

Yes, Mr.

Chair, thank you very much.

So the clerk union that is in front of you this evening consists currently of about 68 employees.

In year one of the contract, we're looking at a base salary increase around 4%.

In year two, in year three of the contract, we're looking at a base salary increase of three percent.

Um in year one, based off of the step increases that uh this unit is uh entitled to, we're looking just over a four percent increase.

Um, and then in year two and three as well, uh, just over a four percent increase, and in year three, uh just under four percent.

A couple things just to call out in year two of the overall contract, we actually are going ahead and increasing or elongating the steps.

Currently, this is a five-step scale um that we have.

We are going to go ahead and make that into nine steps uh in year two and three.

And the other thing that is going to happen is we're actually removing five of the clerical positions out of this union.

Um they will be moving over to the non-affiliated contract.

They are still in this contract related to the overall cost because currently sit here, so the funds do need to be approved, and then we'll move on that money to non-affiliated.

Um, of course, overall there is slightly more than increase because of benefits.

Um, I'd be more than happy to answer questions on the table if there are any.

Any questions from members of the budget committee?

No questions.

All right.

Pretty cool on the screen.

I don't know what's happening there.

All right.

Um, so if there are no additional questions or comments, uh motion is to recommend the full board final passage of R 26041.

All those in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

Motion carries.

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Also for first tonight is our dash 26-044.

Changing the purposes of up to 1,670,000 eighty-five dollars of unexpended bond proceeds from five school building improvement projects to the bicentennial school roof replacement project.

Mr.

Chairman, I would like to make a motion to recommend final passage.

So the motion is to recommend final passage of R26044.

We had the overview at the public hearing.

Are there any additional questions?

Um Tebow?

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I mean, I I guess I don't have a question, it's more of a comment.

So obviously, this is more at aid, so I'm I'm all for fixing our roof, especially when it has as many issues, and I'd be that way if there was another school that had the same issue.

Um for it, I'll vote for it.

The concern I have, I think, is you know, we we have that that plan that came in front of us that had schools that might be closing, and and again, it's not gonna close tomorrow, they're not gonna close in two years or three years, and bicentennial might not be or might be.

I just hate spending money on schools that we might have end up having to close, but um I just hope the board of education kind of comes to a decision on what they want to do sometime in the next six months to a year so we can spend money on the schools we need to and not spend money on the schools that we won't need to.

Um, but other than that, I'm for it.

I think it needs to be done, and and I'll I'll be voting for it.

Thank you.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I um I did have a question to whoever could answer.

Um so, in regard to um reallocating the leftover bond proceeds.

I'm completely in favor of that process.

I think it's a great way to fund additional projects um to avoid taking on additional uh debt liabilities.

My question is are there any time constraints in regard to when we decide to do that?

Um had this pointed out to me today, that part of this resolution includes an exemption of the 1.6 million from the um from the spending cap calculation, similar to what we did in previous years for capital projects like Stellos, and just where we're coming at the telltale end of the fiscal year.

My question is is there any harm in holding this over to the new budget year so that we can calculate that against the spending cap versus exempting this amount because of another 1.6 million in capital expenditures that we have coming up for first read on Tuesday, Mr.

Gray?

Uh Mr.

Gray.

Ms.

Enright.

Don Enright, CFO.

Um I don't know if I could say that there is any any uh time constraints in in doing that.

Um I know that there are some project timing issues that um the school department was hoping to get ahead of to have this money now, but um there is no the only time constraint is that you have to do the refunding within the five years of the sale of the bond, um, and that was uh 2023 was the oldest sale date of of the funds, so we're not within uh we are well within that constraint.

Okay.

The the other concern is we want to get this process going so that we're ready to start this roof as soon as possible, no later than next summer.

No, I understand that.

I just I mean, we're a few weeks out from the first.

Yeah.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chair.

I I too agree.

These are one of those projects.

Every day, every rainstorm today, we've got damage, and it's gonna cost us more to do it.

I worked for the city for 35 years.

A lot of my career was involving the spending cap.

Folks, you've got sold a bill of goods with it.

You know what you saved?

Actually, nothing.

You want me to prove it?

I'll take you over to the parking garages.

Not one, two of them.

They were catastrophic and ready to collapse.

The city couldn't spend any money to repair them.

We've got school buildings that we spent a lot of money.

I'm sure uh Chairman Dow would agree to improve security and all the different things.

You can't do that when you have a spending cap.

And the author of the spending cap didn't give the vote or to a vote to the citizens in Nashua.

He went up and had one uh senator that only has one or two wards in Nashua, write the belt, and it was voted by a Republican House against all 28 delegates in the New Hampshire House against the spending cap.

You want to have a spending cap, put it on a chair, uh get a vote, like they did, but no, they went backdoor statewide, cheap.

The thing is, spending caps hurt, and particularly if you're in an emergency, and you look at Manchester right now.

I think last time I caught what's going on up there, uh, and uh Ms.

Enright, you could correct me, but I think they went 12 percent over their cap.

It doesn't work.

It's up to us to be prudent and everything else, and we're landlords.

We own these structures, and we need to keep them in tip-top shape as a parent of uh new SEROS, and I think Mr.

Smith can agree.

We had to ship kids out at one time to St.

Louis School because it was mold issues and other different things going on with that structure.

I don't want to see that happen to bicentennial or any of our structures.

So those of you that agree with me that stand forward and believe in uh being custodians of proper infrastructure repairs, you know.

I salute you and and uh as chairman of the uh uh infrastructure committee.

This is our job to we I have or I take it as a responsibility to keep our buildings not palaces, but in proper shape, and you can't do that, and I think this is uh prudent way, money that we budgeted that wasn't spent in other past projects, and now to use them prudently and to the repair of a route.

This is pretty good, and I hope we continue this project.

I I love bonding because it diffuses it out for a couple years, and then when we sell the bond, allows us to go back and prudently get more.

It's a system that has worked extremely well.

Correct me if I'm wrong, Ms.

Enright, but it works better than the spending cap.

You know, so I hope you support me with this.

I mean, the good kids, it's not my ward.

That's Alderman Tebow's ward, and I want to close enough to your ward.

Close enough, yeah.

But I want to support him and your words too, to have the best educational facilities we can for our kids.

Let them figure out the school department what they're gonna do with buildings in the future.

That's their job.

But if it comes to us right now, this is our job to put a decent roof and stop the damage that is being done.

So I thank you.

Any additional questions?

Alderman Senate.

Yeah, uh, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

It's um it's not my intention here to debate the merits, good or bad of the spending cap.

Um that's that's really not my intent here.

Um a lot of you know that I work in finance and accounting, uh, thanks to our friends at Tycho and Enron.

There's a whole mess of new laws that make my life a headache every single day that I don't like to have to follow, but I do.

Um I see that as the situation we're in.

You know, um my colleague in Ward 8 often says I hope that the newspapers tomorrow don't say that you know I'm against such and such.

I really hope nobody actually sits out there and thinks I'm against roofs for kids in school.

Um I actually went to bicentennial around the time that the roof would have been replaced last.

Uh I didn't get to reap the benefits because I was actually out in the portables at the time.

But uh be that as it may, it I'm comfortable with every piece of this resolution other than the fact that we have to exempt calculations.

Again, it's that was a vote I struggled with a great deal a couple of years ago, and this close to the end of a fiscal year is just not something that I'm willing to do at this time.

Completely in favor of getting kids a roof on their school.

I'm certain this will pass, but it's just that one machination that I'm not comfortable with.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Although in Tebow?

Yeah, thanks.

I I I mean, I think the whole CAP thing in general, um, not to debate the cap.

I just I just think it really you know, handcuffs us on things like I don't, you know, if we didn't get all that you know, a lot of the security stuff, I think we get that was Esher money or SR money during COVID and stuff, and we may not have been able to spend that if we held close to the cap because it's money that's given to us after the budget's done, and we may not budget for that because we don't know what's coming.

And so I I just think sometimes we get to a point where we may not be able to spend money that's well, I don't want to say gifted because this isn't gifted, we just kind of didn't spend it, right?

Um I want to be hand strung by the cap to the big cities that it hurts when it doesn't hurt Gorham.

And yet Manchester has to spend 12% over, and I don't know, you know, if we're not exempting something, I don't know where we would be either.

So I just I I I wish I mean we were trying to get a tax cap because we thought it might be more fair, we just weren't able to get something that seemed to be right at the time, but I don't think the spending cap works for the city or Manchester, to be honest.

So um I I wish we could do it differently.

Um, but you know, let's I just want to say that, I guess.

Additional questions right?

Mr.

Chair, I there may not be, but in case it's a dissenting vote, I would like to call a roll call if I may, please.

Roll call.

All right.

The motion on the floor is a recommended to the full board final passage of R26044.

It's been requested by roll call.

With the clerk please call the roll.

Other and uh Thibault, yes.

Alderman Alicia Greg?

Yes, Alderman Lodge Michael O'Brien is a yes, Alderman Tim Senate, no, and Alderman Dowd.

Yes, you have uh foyer's and one days.

Okay.

Motion carries.

New business ordinances.

Uh there are none.

Labeling committee.

There is none.

And uh, oh okay, yep.

General discussion.

Yeah.

I I'm not sure there's an issue with with uh the actions that were taken.

It was it went through both legal and finance, and this is the way that they wanted it done.

So all of the Senate.

Oh, thank you.

I just I wanted to respond to that.

No, there's legally there's nothing um in conflict here.

Um I I had a discussion with um with legal today um just regarding this, and you know, they they gave me the numbers as to where we are with the cap and everything and why this has an exemption mechanism to it.

What whereas um legislation that we have coming forward on Tuesday does not.

I understand it, and it in this case I just had to vote my conscience on this one.

That's all.

Okay.

Any other general discussion?

Seeing none.

Public comment.

None.

Remarks by Alderman.

I think we probably Alderman O'Brien.

Yeah, I just want to thank everybody for the well wishes.

I hope you enjoyed my Facebook post.

Uh you know, when you come down and you're knocking on death's door, you know, I kind of see the humor in that, you know.

So anyways, I'd like to thank you all for your support.

When you're sitting there staring out the window at the roof adjacent to you at Mass General, it's a wonderful view.

So, you know, it distracted me a bit from that gorgeous view that I had.

So I thank you all.

Thank you.

All right.

We're glad you're here.

Altman Senate.

Motion to adjourn.

Motion is to adjourn.

All in favor signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Motion carries.

We're adjourned to 741.

So we don't have to.