Nashua Board of Aldermen Committee Meeting - October 27, 2026

The Nashua Board of Aldermen's committee met on October 27, 2026 to consider six resolutions authorizing bonds for capital projects and equipment. After public comment and deliberation, the committee voted to recommend all six resolutions for final passage by the full Board. Key discussion topics included the phased approach to bonding, the separation of the library renovation from library worker contract negotiations, and the total cost of the enterprise resource planning (ERP) system.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Tom Kelly, Board of the Nashua Fire Commission, spoke in support of four fire-related resolutions (R26-068, 069, 070, 071), stating they represent essential investments in public safety and infrastructure.
• No other public comments.

Discussion Items

R26-064 – Capital Equipment Bond ($5,173,428)

• Alderman Kelly questioned the practice of bonding some projects partially and others in full. Director Tim Cummings explained the phased approach for building projects to obtain better cost certainty before committing full construction funding.
• Alderman Clemens supported the phased approach, noting lessons from the Performing Arts Center.
• Motion to recommend final passage passed.

R26-067 – Library Renovation Design Bond ($3,000,000)

• Alderman Thibault expressed strong support for the project but stated he would vote to table it at the full board unless the library worker contract dispute was resolved.
• Alderman Clemens echoed the call for tabling due to the unresolved contract.
• Alderman Greg argued the building and contract are separate issues and should not be conflated.
• Alderman Johnson cautioned against involving the board in contract negotiations, noting the board plays no role in them.
• Alderman O'Brien warned that tying the bond to the contract could constitute an unfair labor practice and urged the board to stay out of negotiations.
• Alderman Wilshire agreed that one should not be tied to the other.
• Alderman Sennett supported O’Brien’s points, stressing the slippery slope of exerting undue influence.
• Alderman Kelly asked for clarification on why the library was only being bonded for $3 million while DPW was bonded for the full $43 million; Director Cummings explained the phased design-and-construction approach.
• Despite many members expressing intentions to table at the full board, the committee voted to recommend final passage.

R26-068 – Fire Training Facility Bond ($1,500,000)

• Alderman Sennett noted that moving the current facility would cost more than this bond.
• Alderman O'Brien highlighted the importance of realistic training for firefighter safety.
• Alderman Johnson expressed concern about transparency, stating she had requested emails and information that were not fully provided.
• Motion carried.

R26-069 – Pine Hill Fire Station Design Bond ($1,000,000)

• Alderman Thibault supported the project, criticizing past boards for deferring maintenance.
• Alderman Clemens (not on the committee) voiced support.
• Motion carried.

R26-070 – Deferred Fire Station Maintenance Bond ($1,000,000)

• Brief support was expressed for addressing long-deferred needs.
• Motion carried.

R26-071 – ERP System Bond ($9,000,000)

• Alderman Sennett asked how the $9 million figure was determined; CFO Don Enright explained it was based on research and historical costs.
• Alderman Sullivan asked about total cost of ownership; Enright clarified the bond covers implementation and two years of service, with annual costs of about $1.2 million ongoing.
• Alderman Tebow calculated the ten‑year total at $18.6 million.
• Alderman Clemens praised the proactive approach.
• Alderman Sennett later stated he voted no because he wanted more clarity on what is being purchased.
• The committee chair questioned why the ERP was not included in the budget, leading to discussion about bonding versus budget increases.
• Motion carried (with at least one dissenting vote).

General Discussion Remarks

• The Chair apologized for disruptive and disrespectful behavior by an audience member toward an employee’s child earlier in the meeting.
• Alderman Thibault condemned the behavior.
• Alderman Sennett explained his no vote on the ERP resolution, reiterating the need for detailed justifications.
• Alderman Clemens countered that bonding avoids a massive tax increase and that the project is proactive.
• Alderman Greg emphasized the value of transparent communication to help the public understand the extensive deliberation preceding these bond requests.

Key Outcomes

• All six resolutions (R26-064, 067, 068, 069, 070, 071) were recommended for final passage to the full Board of Aldermen.
• R26-071 faced one apparent “nay” from Alderman Sennett.
• The meeting adjourned.